Imagine living in the United States before electricity was invented, let alone a computer. At the time, it was quite possible that only a few hundred people lived in any given town. When a crime was committed or a civil dispute went to court, chances were good everyone in the town knew about it and everyone was talking about it. With only a handful of lawyers around, defense attorneys, plaintiffs attorneys and prosecutors might have known intimate details about the judge, jury members and those directly involved in the case.Yes, the jurors, prospective and selected, knew everything about the case. In this environment, how could anyone possibly get a fair trial? Believe it or not, fair trials were possible. They happened all the time.
So, when I hear members of the legal profession lament the fact that social media and the Internet are making jury trials impossible, I have to respond with one of my favorite expressions: “Meh.” Courts have been dealing with many of the challenges at the forefront of the social media debate for centuries. These include determining how to make sure jurors aren’t prejudiced by outside information and how much litigators can learn about jury members prior to voir dire. These aren’t new questions or challenges. They’re just being brought into sharper focus.
